The Greek-Latin Dispute Over the Communion of Infants*1

J S Studia eologica Varsaviensia UKSW

e problem of the infant communion, which in the Catholic-Orthodox con- frontation is rather secondary, has not yet been elaborated on. However, it is an interesting example for the history of theology of how the same theological problem can have diﬀerent contents and functions, depending on the historical context in which it is raised.

Starting Point of the Dispute

e communion of infants was abandoned during the $%&' century in the West- ern Church. is was the result of a new Eucharistic spirituality initiated by a reaction to the Berengarian doctrine. e guiding principle of this spirituality was to emphasize the truth about concomitance, and its most characteristic feature was an increase in respect for the saints. e cessation of the communion of infants was motivated by the danger of unintentional insult, which lasts as long as the child is not able to distinguish the Eucharist from ordinary bread. e Eastern Church did not experience a similar reaction, which of course increased mutual diﬀerences in spirituality and Eucharistic customs. e oldest text on the infant communion dispute comes from the famous Libellus de erroribus Armenorum, the oﬃcial author of which is Pope Benedict XII ($%%*-$%*+), while the actual authors were the two Latinising Armenian bishops. ey counted $$0 Armenian heresies, superstitions and abuses. e publication of this magazine by the Pope provoked a lively reaction in the Arme- nian Church. e pleas were mostly generalised and exaggerated, included in the form of accusations. e answer to these pleas was taken care of by the synod

* STV $3($405)+.

319 Jacek Salij 2 in Sish ($%*+), convened especially for this purpose. e Synod’s explanations are factual and respectful of the Holy See, but at the same time there is much regret in them, especially because of accusations that are particularly unjust or absurd. As for the communion of infants, the Armenians were accused not so much of the mere fact as of binding it to a false doctrine of baptism: that they make the importance of this sacrament dependent on both Confirmation and the Eucharist being given. e Synod in Sish, responding to this accusation, confirmed the custom of giving three sacraments to infants at the same time, but rejected the main accusation as an unjustified insinuation9. e Latin accusation – albeit formulated in a less conciliatory spirit – had a basis in reality. In any case, it is a fact that Gregory Dattivensis (deceased $*$$), who acted a little later and who significantly reinforced anti-Roman tendencies in the Armenian Church, openly accused Latin people that their deceased children do not receive salvation because a;er baptism they do not receive communion<. In addition, giving all three sacraments of initiation to infants helped to create an awareness that baptism could only be given by priests. In the correspondence between Pope Clement VI and the Catholicoi of Armenians a;er the synod in Sish, we find, among other things, the question whether the Armenians recognise the validity of baptism given by a non-priest=. is question has at least two aspects, practical and theoretical. In practice, baptism and priesthood can be so closely connected that laity do not dare to give this sacrament even to a dying child. eoretically, although this is not a necessary consequence of this state of affairs, the validity of baptism given by a priest may not be questioned>. In the letter of Clement VI of +4 September $%?$, there is a reference to a previously issued order of the Pope for the Armenian Church

9 Mansi, vol. +? col. $+%3. < C. Galanus, Conciliationis Ecclesiae Armenae cum Romana , vol. +, Rome $33$, ?4@. = O. Raynaldus, Annales ecclesiastici , vol. $3, Coloniae Agr. $34$, %$*. > Such voices appeared e.g. in older Greek theology, and their source were former canonical regulations reserving communion only for priests and bishops. For example, this is decided by the can. *0 of Apostolic Canons. In: luris ecclesiastici Graecorum historia et monumenta (publ. B. Pitra), vol. $, Rome $53* +%. A similar provision is contained in the Ap- ostolic Constitutions, book %, chap. $% n, where a non-priest who dared to baptise was even compared to the sons of Korah. Ibid., +%?. Photius only questioned the validity of baptism given by someone who pretends to be a priest, but he considered baptism given by a lay person for someone in mortal danger to be important. Letter to Leon Archbishop of Calabria (PG. vol. $@+, col. 00* n.). In the compendium of synodal canons prepared in $%%3, M. Blastaris considered every baptism given by a priest to be doubtful and ordered to repeat it. Syntagma alphabeticum (PG, vol. $** col. $$@5).

320 3 The Greek-Latin Dispute Over the Communion of Infants to stop giving communion to infantsN. is would be Rome’s first formal intervention in this matter. e Florentine Council took a different, more tolerant stance in the dispute over the communion of infants. e formula of the union proposed by the Latin side included the demand to renounce heresy and total tolerance for other differences. As a result of the discussion, the Greeks adopted the position of the Romans on three traditionally controversial issues: the truth about the origin of the Holy Spirit a Patre Filioque, the primacy of the Pope, and the doctrine of Purgatory. e Romans, on the other hand, treated the union not as a return of those who had gone astray, but as a reconciliation of opposing brothers, the sons of one mother ChurchQ. However, it is not known whether Florence dealt with differences considered to be non-heretical. e preserved files of the Council are silent on this subject; however, some data indicate that this issue was the subject of the Council’s discussions. Mansi, for example, signals the opinion expressed by St. Antoninus, a member of the Council, although not yet as a Florentine bishop. Among the eastern rites, which do not contain heresy, although they differ from the rites of the western church, Antoninus also mentions the communion of infantsY. His statement shows a relationship with the Apostolic Constitution of Ac- cepimus nuper of Leon X of $5 May $?+$, which contains the same list of Greek separationsZ. In this document, the Pope strongly defends the Eastern rite in connection with the Latin bishops of the Ionian Sea islands. Leon X states that the criticism of the Greeks on account of their distinctiveness is incom- patible with the findings of the Florence Council. is would argue in favour of the existence of a conciliar document, which is unknown today in this case: probably from there both Antoninus and Leon X drew up a list of approved Greek separations. Contrary to St. Antoninus, the Constitution does not make the slightest allusion about the alleged superiority of Latin over Greek rites. Its general tone indicates that the Pope recognises the equivalence of Greek rites rather than just tolerating them. e classical positions of eastern theology were first defined by St. Simeon of essaloniki and the Nilus of Rhodes. Simeon (deceased $*+4) represents the intransigent direction. His Dialogue in Christo adversus omnes haereses is an

N O. Raynaldus, op. cit., %$?. Q Union bullae of 3 July $*%4, in: Documenta Concilii Florentini de unione Orientalium (publ. G. Hofmann), vol. $, Rome $4%? h. $3 n. Y Mansi, vol. %$, col. $5$+. Z Monumenta Ucrainae Historica , vol. $%, Rome $40% 5% n. (in short: MUH).

321 Jacek Salij 4 extensive argument against the Latins. It culminates in a several-century process initiated by the Constantinople synod of 34+ (called in Trullo), the formation of classical anti-Latin polemics of the Greeks. e arguments used there still constitute an iron repertoire of Orthodox polemics with Catholicism. In removing infants from communion, Simeon sees above all the risk of their loss of salvation_. In his work De sacramentis , he made this allegation particularly harshly clear9`. Nilus, Metropolitan of Rhodes, living one generation before Simeon, spoke more gently on the same subject. Referring to can. 5* of the Synod in Trullo , which refers to the communion of infants, he points out that no canon hinders children’s access to the holy table. Nilus of Rhodes, however, does not go so far as to claim that by refusing it to children eternal salvation was closed to them in this way99. Comparing the positions of Western and Eastern theology in the dispute over the communion of infants, it should be noted that both sides are funda- mentally intolerant to the custom of the other side, with the western side show- ing a slightly higher degree of tolerance. e allegation of misrepresentation in western arguments appears at most indirectly and the Florentine formula, although open also to diminishing interpretations, even proclaims the fundamental equivalence of the two customs. For both parties, the basic principle of the dispute is presented in a different way, to which individual arguments are subordinate. Namely, the East defends the communion of infants in the name of fidelity to tradition, while the West defends its custom in the name of respect for sacred mysteries. In this situation, Western theology can at most proclaim the superiority of its own custom but it cannot accuse heresy of the traditional custom against it. e situation of eastern theology is more difficult in this respect because there are no equally important contraindications to accuse the opposing side of heresy, so this accusation appears more easily and more o;en in it.

The Union of Brest Period

A;er the fall of Constantinople, the main area where western Christianity met or tried to meet the eastern was the Russian lands. During the $3&' century, the ﬁrst descriptions appeared of customs of the Moscow state, which was extremely

_ PG, vol. $?? col. $@+. 9` Ibid., col. +%3. 99 Responsio decima ad Ionam Hieromonachum , in: Inedita canonical responsa Constanti- nopolitani Patriarchae Lucae Chrysovergae et Nili Metropolitae Rodensis , Odessae $4@% 3+ (quote for M. Jugie, "eologia dogmatica Christianorum Orientalium , vol. %, Paris $4%@, %@+).

322 5 The Greek-Latin Dispute Over the Communion of Infants exotic for Europe at that time. However, there is a lot of disinformation in these brochures. J. Fabri, the confessor of the Roman king Ferdinand, writes in $?+$ that the Moskal’s Confirmation is given only by bishops, and is received only a;er reaching adulthood9<. On the other hand, he knows nothing about communion immediately a;er baptism. He only remembers with dismay that the Eucharist is given there to three year old children9=. Another informant at the time, A. Guagnini, attributes to the local Church total conformity with Latin practice in this respect9>. First of all, however, the meeting of both Christian traditions took place in the Kingdom of Poland at that time. e first Polish work devoted to the Ruthenian religion, by the Kraków professor Jan of Oświęcim (Sacranus), was created on the wave of regret over the failure of the union, and is therefore un- friendly to Ruthenians and their religion. e number of three eastern errors in Lyon and Florence grew to *0. e Sacranus also enumerates ++ consecutive schisms that the Eastern Church had undertaken over the centuries. However, he either does not know or does not consider it a mistake to give communion to infants9N. e intellectual situation in Ruthenia and the pressure of Protestantism in the country were not conducive to interest in the issues of Eastern Christianity. is state of affairs changed only when the idea and then the implementation of the union with the Ruthenians encouraged many to grab the pen, both sup- porters and opponents9Q. It is interesting to look at the tracks of the discussion about the communion of infants at the time, as it reflects well the mutual relationship between the two faiths, which was finally perpetuated at that time and is still valid to this day. In particular, it is worth looking at the mechanism that has made the list of heresies that the Orthodox Church exposes to Catholicism much longer than the Catholic list of Orthodox heresies. e main ideologue of the Union was Fr. P. Skarga. His doctrinal settlement, published in $?00,

9< J. Fabri, Religio Moscovitarum , in: [J. Łasicki], De Russorum, Moscovitarum et Tartarorum religione , Spirae $?5+ $00. 9= Ibid., $5%. 9> A. Guagnini, De religione Moscovitarum omniumque Ruthenorum. In: [J. Łasicki], op. cit., +35. 9N Sacranus, Elucidarius errorum ritus Ruthenici. Cracoviae $?@@. In: [J. Łasicki], op. cit., $5*-+$4. 9Q Cf. two bibliographical studies: M. Wiszniewski, Historia literatury polskiej (History of polish literature), vol. 5, Kraków $5?$ +*5-*43; A. Brückner, Spory o unję w dawnej literaturze (Disputes over the union in old literature), KH $@ ($543), no. %, ?05-3**.

323 Jacek Salij 6 follows the line of the Florentine Council9Y. Although Skarga shi;s the focus to the problem of the primacy of the Pope, the basic Florentine assumptions did not changed: to recognise the doctrinal purity of the Roman Church, while to reduce the demands on the Eastern Church to truly relevant. To this end, the author distinguishes between liturgical and dogmatic distinctions, the latter being the only ones that are important to him9Z. In spite of these assumptions, the number of eastern heresies in Skarga increased to $4, of which – a characteristic feature – as many as 0 relate to Eucharistic errors9_. Infant communion was not included in the list because the Council of Trent clearly stated that there was no doctrinal error in this custom. In the first years a;er the signing of the Union in Brest in $?43, its sup- porters not only stressed the equivalence of the two traditions and the invalidity of liturgical differences, but also preferred to use a more conciliatory Florentine list than the one drawn up by the Complaint, as regards dogmatic differences. If they sometimes mentioned the communion of infants, it is only when calcu- lating the differences that deserve to be respected<`. With time, however, reference was made to this rite for polemic purposes. Namely, the anti-Uniates, initially poorly prepared theologically to polemics with Catholicism, drew on the anti-Catholic achievements of Protestants and emphasised, among other things, the accusation that Catholics give communion only in one form. Although this allegation did not directly concern individuals, by reason of the union they felt obliged to defend the dogmatic legitimacy of the Latin custom. e fact that communion of infants is usually given to infants in the Eastern rite in one form, and yet such communion is not considered un- worthy or less worthwhile, proved to be a useful argument. Bishop H. Pociej, in his great apologetic letter to Patriarch Alexandria Meletius ($3@$), quotes this argument twice<9. M. Smotrycki also refers to the communion of infants as an argument in a letter from %@ October $3+4 to the Patriarch of Constantinople, Cyril

9Y P. Skarga, O jedności Kościoła Bożego pod jednym Pasterzem, y o greckim od tey jedności odstąpieniu , Vilnius $?00. Quote for: Pamiatniki polemiczeskoj literatury (Russkaja istoriczeskaja bibliotieka), vol. +, Petersburg $55+ (a text with annotations of the additions made to the edition: Kraków $?4@). 9Z Ibid., col. *4+. 9_ Ibid., col. *0$-*00. <` Cf. e.g: Harmonia albo Concordantia wiary, sakramentów y ceremoniey Cerkwi ś. ori- entalnej z Kościołem ś. rzymskim , $3@5. In: Pamiatniki polemiczeskoj literatury, op. cit., vol. + col. $4% n. <9 H. Pociej, Obrońca Wiary S. Katolickiey , Supraśl $035, 3+.$@$.

324 7 The Greek-Latin Dispute Over the Communion of Infants

Lukaris<<. Smotrycki, one of the leading anti-Uniate publicists and the creator of an excellent grammar of Russian, in July $3+0 secretly professed the Catholic faith before the Uniate Metropolitan Józef Rutski<= Two years later he writes a letter to Lukaris in which he asks the Patriarch to make efforts to unite the two Churches. Perhaps it was an attempt to implement the union’s plans of Prince Konstanty Ostrogski, who was outraged by the only partial union carried out by Bishops Pociej and Terlecki. According to Smotrycki, a new point of disa- greement was added to the old discrepancies between the two Churches, namely the matter of communion in one form. However, this problem should have not constituted a significant obstacle because also in the Eastern Church infants were given only the Lord’s Blood, while the sick were given only the Body itself, and it is not for them to criticise in the Romans what they do on their own<>. While the Catholic side not only did not accuse the anti-Uniates of heresy because of giving communion to infants but even positively used this fact in their polemics, the opposite side quite quickly accused a violation of faith due to the abandonment of this rite in the Catholic Church. For the first time, this accusation was formulated in the anonymous work Antigraphe

<< MUH, vol. +, 45-$@4. <= Ibid., %$. <> Ibid., $@%.

325 Jacek Salij 8 themselves against the Orthodox Union lengthens the list of the opponent’s mistakes to the maximum. e very title of the book reveals the author’s basic idea

326 9 The Greek-Latin Dispute Over the Communion of Infants

In the period of the Brest Union it is possible to observe a typical pattern of behaviour towards unification proposals. Since this controversy is dogmatically secondary, parties seeking reconciliation – all Latin theologians and Uniate theologians – try to emphasise the doctrinal legitimacy of the existing differences. Anti-Uniate theologians, on the other hand, are interested in emphasising the dogmatic importance of even secondary differences, in order to protect their Church from the destructive influence of the union in their opinion. Sakowicz’s speech was an announcement of a change in this situation. Namely, it expresses its resignation from the hope of unification of the entire Eastern Church in the Kingdom of Poland for the union. As this hope became increasingly more faint, the Uniate Church was somehow forced to look for its own formula of identity and to define its attitude towards the anti-Uniate Church. Sakowicz was the first to understand the situation intuitively, although probably not very consciously. In $3%% Władysław IV recognised the legality of the anti-Uniate hierarchy in his country. It was becoming increasingly clear that the anti-Uniates would remain a permanent and significant phenomenon in the country and that the Union process encountered almost insurmounta- ble barriers and would stop there. As a result, in the Uniate Church there was a need for a clear separation from the anti-Uniates and development on one’s own territory. In this way, the list of heresies exhibited by the Uniates on the Orthodox Church also became much longer; as part of this trend, infant communion became one of the first elements that the Uniate liturgy tried to change.

Disappearance of Infant Communion in the Uniate Church

Both in Florence and in Brest the equality of both practices with regard to the communion of infants was recognised. So how did it happen that in a relatively short time the superiority of Western discipline was recognised? A partial answer to this question can be found in the treaties on this subject of P. Arkudiusz and K. Galano, two outstanding Uniate theologians of the $0&' century==. Both theologians were closely connected with the Union movement within the territory of the Kingdom of Poland. e Greek Archduke personally participated in the Brest Synod in $?43, the Italian Galano in $33*-$333 stayed in Lviv with the union’s mission among the Armenians.

== P. Arcudius, De concordia Ecclesiae occidentalis et Orientalin in septem sacramentorum administratione , Paris $3+3; C. Galano, De communione puerorum ante perfectum usum rationis, in: Conciliationis Ecclesiae Armenae cum Romana , vol. +, Rome $33$, ?54-3@%.

327 Jacek Salij 10

According to the Archdiocese, the doctrine of the salvific necessity of giving communion infants is proclaimed not by the Greek Church, but by Greek heretics. Heresy is based on two erroneous assumptions: $) Baptism is invalid if it is not affirmed by Confirmation and Communion; +) Baptism forgives only sins, while God’s life is given by Confirmation and Communion. Meanwhile, “through baptism man truly and inwardly becomes a righteous and holy son of God, and thus an heir and participant of the heavenly kingdom.” Baptism would not be a sacrament of rebirth if we did not receive life through it. Children who die without baptism do not suffer, they only do not receive salvation. On the other hand, the Eucharist is not necessary for salvation necessitate medii , nor is it necessary for infants to help repel temptations, nor is it necessary for babies to eat it spiritually in voto Ecclesia. Hence the danger of insult during distribution is a sufficient reason not to give communion to infants. e postulate of Arcudius is therefore unequivocal: although the Roman Church does not condemn the Greek rite, the Greeks would have done better if they had adapted to the Roman Church rather than abiding by the old custom=>. e theology of Arcudius, although of a large class, is undoubtedly a western theology. is is indicated not only by its scholastic terminology (necessity of necessitate medii, sacrament in voto Ecclesiae ), but above all by the one-sided concept of the salvific role of the Eucharist. It derives from the Augustinian theology of grace, understood mainly as a help on the way to salvation. Although the Eucharist for Arcudius is the sacrament of belonging to the Body of Christ, on this level the actual reception of the Eucharist is not necessary even for adults, but it is necessary as an aid in the fight against sin. In the same spirit and using similar arguments he develops Galano’s arguments. A new element of this theologian’s work was the clear definition of the main objection against Western custom, formulated in the spirit of West- ern theology. Even if communion is not necessary for infants, it undoubtedly increases the grace of baptism. So why is it denied to infants? In answering this question, Galano does not go beyond the traditional arguments of Western theology, namely, he refers to $ Corinthians $$:+5 for the conscious reception of the Eucharist, while infants are not capable of receiving this sacrament with faith and devotion. e practical proposal for a treaty is also the same as in the case of Arcudius. e author advises Armenians to adapt to the Roman custom as a better expression of respect for the Eucharist=N.

=> P. Arcudius, op. cit., %3-*?.+05-%$4. =N Cf. Galano, op. cit., ?43f.

328 11 The Greek-Latin Dispute Over the Communion of Infants

Both treatises are enlivened by the same concern for demonstrating the validity of Western practice and the same lack of interest in the arguments in favour of preserving traditional customs. In both treatises, it is based on Western theology, while theoretical arguments are placed above the existing tradition. In a word, Uniate theology, cutting itself off from the polemical, anti-Western tradition initiated by Simeon of essaloniki did not develop its own position, more in line with the spirit of the East, on the communion of infants and adopted the solutions of Western theology in their entirety. e practice quickly adapted to theology. In the Russian Church the communion of infants was abolished by the Zamość synod in $0+@. e clause authorising priests not to make changes if this threatens to be scandalous shows that the custom that was then in common use, or at least not dying out, was abolished. e text speaks with great respect about the custom to date, while the change is justified in terms of due reverence for the Blessed Sacrament and the religious harmlessness of depriving infants of communion. e Synod also decided – following the Western custom – to catechise children who are to receive Holy Communion a;er reaching an appropriate age=Q. e Zamość Synod is undoubtedly a landmark date in the history of the Greek Catholic Church in the Kingdom of Poland. Depending on the point of view, it is said to have been a summary of more than a hundred years of united Catholicism or more than a hundred years of their Latinisation. e most important subject of the reform was the revision of liturgical books, as a result of which the Uniate liturgy was finally harmonised with the Catholic theology of the time. e process of the disappearance of infant communion in other Uniate Churches is also significant. In this intervention of $?+$ Leon X defended, among other things, the legitimacy of the communion of infants. In $?3* Pius IV included the communion of infants among the heretical and godless practices and ridiculous madness committed by the Italo-Greeks=Y. is is the first papal statement against this rite a;er the Florentine Council. e sharp tone of the speech was caused by the schismatic tendencies of the Italian Greeks at the time, which led the Pope limiting their previous exemption. e Pope’s inclusion of infants on the list of Greek errors is astonishing, all the more so as

=Q Synodus provincialis Ruthenorum habita in civitate Zamosciae anno +341 , Rome $0+*. Quote from the second edition: Vilnae $000, 33f.0$f. =Y Pius IV, Bullarum, diplomatum et privilegiorum sanctorum Romanorum Potiﬁcum , vol. 0, Augustae Taurinorum $53+, +0$f.

329 Jacek Salij 12 the Council of Trent, convened by the Pope two years earlier, clearly stated the orthodoxy of this ancient custom. It may be added that the Pope’s decree does not contain a formal ban. e list of errors written in anger reveals the author’s personal aversion to the Italian Greeks. e communion of infants in the Italian Uniate Church was not abolished until Benedict XIV with the Constitution of Etsi pastoralis of $0*+=Z. Although the Popes sometimes suggested to the Eastern Churches to adopt the Roman custom, they refrained from direct interventions=_. Benedict XIV himself was an outstanding and kind expert in Eastern rites. He also repeatedly ordered Latin Ordinarians and priests to respect eastern liturgical differences. However, the secret of his speech on infant communion seems simple. Namely, Rome ap- plied different rules to the Uniate Churches in the East, while treating Uniates scattered among Latins differently. In the latter case, he was rather interested in the slow absorption of the Uniates by the Latin Church, without even hesi- tating to use certain forms of discrimination for this purpose>`. In particular, he supported the reform of those rituals that somehow influenced the doctrine. e correctness of the above interpretation is indicated by the fact that in the famous encyclical on Eastern rites Allatae sunt of $0??, the same Benedict XIV suggests abandoning the communion of infants, but does not issue any order on this subject>9. Although the papal wish is different from the injunction, it is undoubtedly a form of pressure. e fact that the Pope wishes to stop the communion of infants in this encyclical sheds new light on the problem of Lat- inisation because the encyclical is directed against the Latinisation of Eastern rites. Benedict XIV saw the abandonment of the communion of infants not as a sign of Latinisation, but only as “a consequence of the Catholic principle of special reverence for the Blessed Sacrament.” is gives rise to a difficult and sensitive problem, where the boundary between Catholicisation and the Latinisation of the Eastern rites runs. Catholi- cisation expresses the Holy See’s concern for the doctrinal legitimacy of Eastern Christianity. On the other hand, Latinisation, which means Latin influences that have no dogmatic or pastoral justification, is intrinsically undesirable because it contributes to the disappearance of the rich tradition of the Eastern rite.

=Z Benedictus XIV, Bullarium ab anno +30/ (!) usque ad totum annum +308 , Rome $03$, 03. =_ Cf. Letter by Gregory X of March +933 to the Patriarch of the Maronites , in: Bullarium Maronitarum (ed. T. Anaissi), Rome $4$$, 0+. >` Cf. the rules on mixed marriages in the aforementioned Constitution of Benedict XIV, op. cit., 5@. >9 Benedictus XIV, Opera omnia , vol. 5, Prati $5*%, %%$f.

330 13 The Greek-Latin Dispute Over the Communion of Infants

In practice, it is sometimes difficult to draw a line between the two phenomena, especially – as can be seen in this case – when there are many reasons for both a change and abandonment of a change. In the history of the Eastern Churches, all too o;en, under the slogan of eliminating doctrinal errors, this boundary has been moved in favour of Lat- inisation. On the other hand, the Catholic opponents of Latinisation generally did not face this problem: by postulating de-Latinisation, they kept quiet about the changes in their rite that were too clearly related to dogma. A characteristic feature is the coincidence of some dates. In $?43, the Holy See undertook to fully respect the request of the Brest Synod that all rites and ancient ceremonies of the Greek Churches contained in the traditional liturgical books be le; unchanged and completely intact><. In the same year, the synod of the Maronite Church, the oldest Uniate Church, introduced significant liturgical changes>=. Similarly, Pope Benedict XIV, who forbade Italian Uniates to give communion to infants, and advised all Uniates to stop this ritual, issued different instructions to Coptic missionaries. is was the response of the Congregation of the Holy Office of June $*, $0*$ to the letter of the missionary Remigio da Trento. is missionary describes in detail the insults to which the Blessed Sacrament is threatened when given to infants. Undoubtedly he was not personally convinced of this ritual and expected that the Holy See would authorise missionaries in Egypt to stop it. However, the Congregation’s answer was completely different: although it is better and more appropriate not to give communion to infants, this custom should not be pushed forward as contrary to the Copts’ rite, which is ancient and does not oppose faith. In order not to discourage the very idea of union, missionaries should respect all rituals that do not endanger the soul and do not oppose the dignity of the Church. With regard to the communion of infants, it is sufficient to exercise due care to ensure that the sacrament has the respect it deserves>>. It would be unfair to accuse the Holy See of having a double policy towards the Eastern Churches. It is enough to recall that in all Uniate settlements Rome demanded a clear renunciation of views that it considered heretical. However, it showed considerable tolerance for those rituals which it considered inappropriate (e.g. some of the seven Eucharistic errors listed by P. Skarga) or less appropriate

>< MUH, vol. $, $34. >= e records of the Maronite Synod on Mount Lebanon from $?43 were published by Mansi, vol. %?, col. $@+$-$@+5. e Synod prohibits, among other things, communion to infants (can. 0). is ban will be recalled by the synod on Mount Lebanon in $0%3, Ibid., vol. %5, col. *0. >> Collectanea S. Congr. de Propaganda Fide, vol. $, Rome $4@0, $@@f.

331 Jacek Salij 14

(e.g. the communion of infants). In these matters, Rome basically chose a strat- egy of patience and not imposing anything by force. Changes were made only when the Uniates themselves became mature in their understanding and need, although sometimes the Holy See supported and even accelerated the process. Only in the case of the Italian Greeks was there direct papal intervention, while in all other cases the change was passed by the synods>N. However, judging only the method of change can be accused of the intention to deprive the Uniate Churches of their eastern identity at the root of the Roman idea of the EU. is accusation should also be considered using the example of the Zam- ość Synod, especially criticised by opponents of the Union>Q. To some extent, it was also undermined by the Uniate opponents of Latinisation>Y Resolutions of the synod only give general guidelines, rarely entering into specific matters. In the executive regulations to the liturgical reform undertaken by the synod, the justification of individual decisions was abandoned>Z. at is why it is necessary to refer to a detailed study of the archimandrite of Polikarp Filipowicz, who, as a censor, prepared implementing regulations>_. e liturgical reforms can be divided into four groups. e first included dogmatic reforms aimed at adapting the liturgy more closely to the new dogmatic situation that arose since the Union. e recollections of the Pope in the liturgy had been consistently introduced, and the symbol of faith had been placed in Filioque. Texts that might suggest that the fate of the deceased has not yet been resolved by the time of the final court had been retouched. e references to only seven general councils were removed, as well as references to the idea of communion with the anti-Uniate Church, e.g. the reference to customs or Kyiv synods. In the same way, the recollections of St. Grzegorz Pałama and Marek Efeski were removed. Finally, a series of reforms were undertaken, the guiding principle of which was to show special respect for the Eucharist: it was forbid- den to bring wine already mixed with water to church, the ritual of pouring

>N To these Uniate synods, which abolished the communion of infants, two Melchick synods from $04@ and $5@3 should be added. Mansi, vol. *3, col. 3%%.0%+. >Q Cf. J. Siemaszko, Zapiski , vol. $, Sankt-Peterburg $55%; G. Chruszczewicz, Istorija Zam- ojskago Sobora , Vilnius $55@. >Y Cf. M.M. Solowij, De reformatione liturgica Heraclii Lisowvskij, Archiepiscopi Polocensis , Rome $4?@ h. $+@-$+?. >Z Ob isprawlenii bogosłużebnych knig. Okrużnoje pismo uniatskago mitropolita Afanasija Szeptyckago k duchowieństwu ot $0%5 goda, Poczajew $4@? (ordinance on the communion of infants can be found on page %@). is text, published as part of the anti-Uniate action, is supplied with a biased discussion of synodal regulations. >_ MUH, vol. ? h. %0$-*$?.

332 15 The Greek-Latin Dispute Over the Communion of Infants warm water into the cup was abolished, scrupulousness was increased by the Eucharistic crumbs and the communion of infants was abandoned. Finally, in defence of the virginity of St. Joseph, the claim that he was a widower was removed, and the verse that the prophet Elijah had been sanctified even before his conception was modified. e second group consisted of reforms with a pastoral goal. Long prayers of almost half an hour during the sacrament of penance, which made it practi- cally impossible to use the sacrament more o;en and more widely, were replaced by a short liturgy, Latinised to such an extent that it even added absolution from ecclesiastical censorship. e ban on baptism during Lent was li;ed and the canon refusing to baptise the deceased as a result of the duel, even if they had repented before their death, has been relaxed. e third group included reforms directed against anti-Latin texts or texts that could be interpreted as anti-Latin texts. For example, the phrases directed against Latin people that they use unleavened bread have been deleted, the remark that baptism by only one immersion is heretical and that in such a case the baptism should be repeated and the mention of the alleged heresy of Pope Honorius had been erased. Finally, the fourth group introduced a series of detailed deletions and re- touches to adapt the liturgical books to the current liturgical reality or to adapt them to the new mentality. For example, orders no longer observed that marriage should be celebrated that baptism should be preceded by forty days of strict fasting, and participation in the liturgy by three days of sexual restraint, which also applies to lay people, had been removed. An intervention was made in a text expressing the assumption that God’s judgement will take place in March. In the description of Our Lady of Sorrows, the emphasis was shi;ed from the external manifestations of pain to the plane of the spirit. e form of “Save me by faith and hope alone,” which could be used by Protestants, was replaced by the prayer “Save me by infinite goodness and thy mercy.” e Zamość Synod became the basic point of reference for the Orthodox Church, especially the Russian criticism of the Union. In addition, this synod has been constantly invoked to justify the use of violence against the Uniate Church in $5%4 and $50*. Indeed, Western influence on both the resolutions of this synod and the development of the Uniate Church in general was undoubtedly something. On the other hand, it is doubtful whether the changes introduced by virtue of their very source deprived the Eastern Church of its identity or obscure it. is allegation could relate at most to some of them. For it does not seem that the essence of Eastern spirituality is total impenetrability when it comes to external influences. Nor can it be argued that this spirituality

333 Jacek Salij 16 by its very nature rejects development or the need for reform, or that it must be anti-Western or indifferent to changing pastoral needs. e polemic about the Latinisation of the Eastern Church resembles a discussion between Slavophiles and settlers (ophthalmologists) about Russia’s attitude towards the West. Just as one cannot believe that Kirejewski or Ax- akov were better Russians than Bieliński or Hercen, or vice versa, it would be just as risky to claim that the Uniate Church is less eastern than the Orthodox Church. Besides, the Orthodox Church is also not alien to flying tendencies, as evidenced by the role of omism in the Kiev Academy or the Protestant traditions of Russian school theology in the nineteenth century. As far as the Zamość Synod is concerned, it undoubtedly reflects the occidental tendencies of the living Church, whose shepherds honestly cared for the spiritual goodness of the sheep- fold entrusted to them, and at the same time were sincerely attached to their rite. Finally, it is worth summarising the reasons for the disappearance of infant communion in the Uniate Church. Although giving communion to infants does not violate any dogma, Catholic theology has pointed to dogmatic reasons, recommending that this custom be abandoned rather than upheld. e main reason for this was special respect due to the Eucharist, while the secondary reason was the fact that young children were unable to distinguish the Eucharist from ordinary bread. erefore, the Holy See generally supported the process of departing from the ancient custom, also when it was strongly committed to defending the Eastern rite from unnecessary Latin influences. In principle, however, the changes came from the Uniate Churches themselves, although Un- iate theology did not develop its own perspective on the subject, repeating only Western approaches. is state of affairs was largely due to the fact that Eastern traditional theology treated this problem in a polemical, anti-Western spirit. Moreover, the abandonment of the communion of infants brought some pastoral fruit in the form of the obligation to catechise before the first communion. On the other hand, the dogmatic fuzziness of the problem allowed different positions to be taken on it, depending on the circumstances. As a rule, during the formation of the union, the Holy See maintained respect for the communion of infants, as well as for all rites that did not directly oppose Catholic dogma. e changes came usually a;er many years of communion with Rome and were a sign of the final acquisition of Catholic consciousness by the Uniate Churches, as well as an expression of a loss of hope for the Orthodox Church’s union adjacent to a given Church. Different solutions to this problem reflect the classic tension between centripetal and centrifugal tendencies in the Un- iate Church of the Christian East. ere is no reason to attribute any of these tendencies to a monopoly on authentic Eastern spirituality.

334 17 The Greek-Latin Dispute Over the Communion of Infants

The Problem of Infant Communion in Accusations of Latinisation of the Union

e murders committed in $0@? by Tsar Peter on the Basilians in Polotsk heralded a new period in the history of the Russian Uniate ChurchN`. Taking advantage of the weakening and then collapse of the Kingdom of Poland, the Tsardom began a decisive policy of violence against the union without any ideological argument or polemics. As we know, there was no shortage of rape – mutual rape – during the enlargement of the Union. However, while in connection with the Brest Union a rich theology developed, both propagating and fighting the union, now the polemic theology had been replaced by imperial demonstrations and official writings of Orthodox bishops and tsarist governors. In the times of the Kingdom of Poland, decisions about the union were made by the interested parties themselves. For example, the diocese of Przemyśl adopted the union only in $34+, the Lviv diocese in $0@@, and Łuck in $0@+, because the bishops of these dioceses did not join the union until then. e anti-Uniate hierarchy was allowed to exist even in those cities whose rightful bishops accepted the union, which was tantamount to allowing for the existence of a diocese in the Uniate diocese. Now the Tsardom had appropriated the right to decide on the faith of the subjects. Its policy consistently sought the complete liquidation of the union and in a short period of time it reached its goal, despite the interruption in persecution that took place during the reign of Paul I and Alexander I. In view of the complete lack of polemic literature during this period, the study of the problem of infant communion must necessarily confine itself to describing the mechanism of this silence, as well as the restoration of the paths of liturgical reform, carried out under the slogan of returning to the pure Eastern liturgy. e period of persecution during the reign of Catherine II may be omitted, despite all its sharpness, as there was no attempt to interfere in the liturgy celebrated by the Uniate Church at that timeN9. e official beginning of the liquidation of the union was – inspired by the memorial of a young Uniate priest J. Siemaszko – the depiction of Nicholas

N` Ibid., $*-+5. N9 Cf. extensive set of documents, MUH. vol. 0. e military action of Catherine was accompanied by propaganda developed by G. Konisski, the Orthodox archbishop of Mohilev, about the alleged persecution that the Orthodox Church was supposed to suﬀer at that time from the Uniates. G. Konisskij, Słowa i rieczi, Mogilew $%4+. e history of the whole action was prepared in the biased spirit by M. Kojałowicz, Istorija wozsojedinienija zapadno-russkich uniatow starych wremien , Saint-Petersburg $50%.

335 Jacek Salij 18

I from ++ April $5+5, establishing a church college of the Greek-Uniate ChurchN<. e tsar imposed on the college, among other things, the obligation to ensure that the liturgy in the Uniate Church was purely eastern, not polluted by foreign influences, which was guaranteed in the Uniate bullae of $?4?. e show was unequivocally directed against the Zamość synodN=. e more far-sighted immediately saw in it a stage on the road to the liquidation of the unionN>. In a short period of time new tsarist and college decrees appeared, which introduced the Russian language into schools and seminars, abolished Basilian monasteries, ordered the expulsion of organs, bells, limited contacts with the Latin Church and the suchlike. e new regulations were published by the Tsarist authori- tiesNN. At the same time, the repression of priests opposed to the changes took place, such as expulsion from the parish, flogging, imprisonment, penance in an Orthodox monastery or deportation. e key factor was the decree of the college of 0 February $5%*, which ordered the Uniate Orthodox churches to accept liturgical books, printed in the synodal printing house in MoscowNQ. In a memorial to the government from % October $5%0, Siemaszko himself stressed that the Uniate religion consists almost exclusively of simple people, for whom external differences are the most important obstacle to turning to Orthodoxy. is explains why it was necessary to introduce the decoration and liturgical rituals of the Greek-Russian Orthodox Church into the Uniate Church. With all their practical significance, they did not violate dogmatic and fundamental beliefs, and therefore, according to the author, they could not give either the Uniate clergy or the Latin an important reason for protest or justified complaintsNY. e “Uniate Work” – as Siemaszko perversely calls the whole action – was clearly subordinated to Great Belarusian nationalism, with the aim of transforming the Uniate “from semi-Polish Catholics into Orthodox Russians.”NZ is transformation was to take place “imperceptibly” ( nieczuwstwitielno , niezamietno – words o;en appearing on the pages of Siemaszko’s Notes ).

N< MUH, vol. 5, $*3-$?@. N= is was immediately understood in Rome. is is evidenced by a report written in No- vember $5+5 by Archbishop Caprano of the Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith on the possible consequences of the tsarist ukase. MUH, vol. 5, $%%-$*3. Among the rituals at risk, Caprano also mentions a new practice for the communion of infants. Ibid., $%4. N> Cf. statement by A. Campodonico, who was in St. Petersburg at the time. MUH, vol. 5 $%$ﬀ. NN e main documents on this subject were collected by J. Siemaszko himself, in: op. cit. NQ Ibid., vol. $, 33+ﬀ. NY Ibid., vol. +, $*.$4. NZ Memorial of June $5%?, Ibid., vol. $, 34$.

336 19 The Greek-Latin Dispute Over the Communion of Infants

It was striking that there was no effort on the part of the reformers to convince them of the rightness of the changes introduced. e changes were introduced on a flat-rate basis, under the slogan of de-Latinisation and de-Polonisation. ere was not even a list of Latinisms that should be cleaned from the Uniate liturgy – it was to be undertaken automatically, by the very use of the Moscow liturgical bookN_. In addition to the insistence that the clergy should actually celebrate according to these books, the main attention was paid to the introduction of the tsarist gates, the ejection of organs, bells. e tomb of God decorated in the Polish way or paintings of St. FrancisQ`. e “Uniate Work” was completed on $+ February $5%4, when the incorpo- ration of the Uniate Church in Russia to the Orthodox Church was officially announced. Similarly, although with some modifications, the union was liquidated in the Congress Kingdom as part of Russification a;er Poland’s January UprisingQ9. Since it was no longer possible to carry out “ nieczuwstwitielno ” in this liquidation, its promoters (Bishop-intruder M. Popiel and several dozen priests – apostates from Galicia) were Orthodox from the very beginning. A po- lice method of summoning priests individually was also undertaken in order to force them to adopt the Orthodox Church. ere were attempts to convince, but above all the argument that Orthodoxy is the indigenous religion of these lands was developed. In the face of the actual failure of the whole action, an opinion was even voiced that for the liturgy to be purely Orthodox, it is not necessary to fully comply with the Moscow liturgical booksQ<. However, with regard to the communion of infants, the Uniate discipline, as too openly Latin, could not be tolerated. us, for example, in the report of an archival visit in $55@ in the former Uniate Orthodox churches of Chełm region, there is information that in some churches, according to the old Orthodox custom, during the bishop’s liturgy, children were brought to Holy Communion

N_ e only such list can be found in the unﬁnished work of Siemaszko of $5+0 r. Soczinienie o Prawoslawii Wostocznoj Cerkwi, printed ibid., vol. $ %@5-%%4. e author mentions, among other things, the abandonment of the communion of infants (p. %%+). Q` ese cases are, for example, the only subject of a visit to parishes carried out by Siemaszko in $5%0. +, %4-??. Sensitised to the way priests celebrate the liturgy, Siemaszko does not mention giving communion or not to infants. is is probably due to the fact that communion was rarely celebrated at that time. Q9 Cf. J. Pruszkowski, Martyrologium czyli Męczeństwo Unii S-tej na Podlasiu , vol. $-+, Lublin $4+$-$4++. Q< Cf. Niedoumjennyje woprosy cerkownej praktiki w sowierszenii bogoslużeniija , Chołm- sko-Warszawskij Eparchialnyj Wiestnik 5 ($553), 3$f.

337 Jacek Salij 20 in significant numbers – up to *@, and up to as many as 3@Q=. is indicates the introduction of this rite by new hosts and from this point of view it is a secondary matter whether the information concerns a fact or just a desire for a fact. A separate question on this subject in the Catechism’s elaboration of the sacrament of Penance and the Eucharist has a similar meaningQ>. ere are still some anti-Latin tendencies to be discussed in the Uniate Church itself. Such tendencies were never lacking in the Uniate Church and they had their prominent representatives also among the hierarchy, e.g. Bishop of Chełm J. Susza ($3?+-$35?) or Archbishop of Polotsk H. Lisowski ($05*-$5@4). e latter began work on the de-Latinisation of the Uniate liturgy, criticising the Zamość synod for this. He justified his intention with a practical objective, i.e. with regard to the enlargement of the Union. Excessive separateness of the Uniate liturgy from the schismatic liturgy, as it is called, alienated the anti-Un- iates to the Union, hence the differences had to be reduced to a minimum. e list of Latinisms drawn up by Lisowski on +5 December $053 in a letter to the Warsaw nuncio F. Saluzzo is extensiveQN. It is striking that there are no changes aimed at taking care of the special respect due to the Blessed Sacrament. Lis- owski is also silent about the abandonment of the communion of infants. At the same time, the openness and courage with which the Polotsk archbishop describes the reform he is carrying out suggests that the reason for this silence is not the fear of being put at risk by the Holy See, but rather his own Catholic consciousness, i.e. the awareness of the dimensions of dogmatic changes not included in the list. If this silence was due to tactical reasons, it was at least testimony that the author knew that in the eyes of the Holy See these changes had a connection with dogma. In the $4&' century only the Uniate Church in Galicia could develop normally, but the situation of the union in the Tsardom of Russia contributed to a significant inhibition of anti-Latin tendencies in it. ey appeared only marginally and in the form of pro-Orthodox and Belarusian currentsQQ. e situation at the time is reflected in the commentary by the Lviv metropolitan H. Jachimowicz to the encyclical Amantissimus of Pius IX dedicated to the

Q= Ibid., + ($55@), %+?. Q> Katichiziczeskoje uczenije prawosławnej Cerkwi o tainstwach Pokajanija i św. Pric- zaszczenija , Ibid., 3 ($55*), %@%. QN is letter was published by M. M. Soloviy, op. cit., $+@-$+?. QQ Galician Ukrainian activists have o;en complained that Poles exaggerate the importance of these trends. Cf. Annales Ecclesiae Ruthenae (publ. M. Harasiewicz), Leopoli $53+, $@+%; H. Jachimowicz, De ritibus observandis , Leopoli $53+, $3.

338 21 The Greek-Latin Dispute Over the Communion of Infants

Eastern liturgies. e Metropolitan omitted the papal warning against arbitrary reforms in liturgy and the use of liturgical books not approved by the Holy See, believing that it did not apply to his ChurchQY. At that time, the decisions of the Zamość Synod were universally adhered to in the matter of communion for children, as can be seen from the reactions of the Galician Uniates to the Eucharistic revival in Pius X’s time. ey prove that the Latin custom was rooted and unchallenged thereQZ. e internal tension between the two tendencies only revived in the Gali- cian Church a;er the First World War. e centripetal tendencies were mainly represented in the Lviv environment, under the patronage – albeit with some distance – of Metropolitan A. Szeptycki himselfQ_. e main motor behind this trend was the monthly magazine Nywa, headed for many years by H. Kostelnyk, known especially from his activity in $4*?. e Ideal Bible of Nywa and the whole current was the famous work of C. Koralewski (real name: Charron) about the Uniate movementY`. In fact, it was only a;er its appearance that Byzantinism (as the movement described itself) became apparent as a phenomenon that was important and had a clearly deﬁned ideologyY9. e aim of Byzantinism was to restore its original purity to the Eastern rite. e cossing of diﬀerent elements in the union was, as it was claimed, the most serious obstacle to its propagation. Kostelnyk even went so far as to dubiously claim that Russia hated the union mainly because it saw it as a tool for the Latinisation and Polonisation of the Russian nation. If the Uniate Church had not been Latinised and Polonised at the time, the Tsardom of Russia, according to the author, would have had almost no reason to persecute the UnionY<. With regard to the Eucharistic customs, Kostelnyk decisively questioned the need for the Eastern rite to accept

QY H. Jachimowicz, op. cit., $+-$0. QZ Cf. I. Czarnodola, Ważnist perszoj św. spowidi i perszoho św. pryczastyja ta sposib prigot- owanja ditej do sych św. Tajn , Nywa % ($4@3), +5?-+4@.%$*-%+@; K. Czechowicz, Dekret św. Apost. Prestola o perszom pryczastyju ditej , Wistnyk Peremyskoj Eparchii +* ($4$+), $*+-$**. e second item is a pastoral letter on the occasion of the decree Quam singulari. K. Czechowicz comments with particular fondness on the passus of the decree, expressing sympathetically about the custom of giving communion to infants in the Eastern liturgies. In his statement, however, there is not even a trace of a postulate to restore this custom in the Galician liturgy. Q_ A. Szeptyckyj, Pastyrskyj lyst pro obrjadowi sprawy , Lwiw $4%$. e author proclaims the need for moderate de-Latinisation of the Greek liturgy, emphasising that the reform can only be carried out by canonical means. Y` C. Korolevskij, L’uniatisme (Irènikon 9-/) , Prieuré d’Amay $4+0. Y9 H. Kostelnyk, Unija w ewolucji , Nywa +% ($4+5), $-?. Y< H. Kostelnyk, Na zakinczannja , ibid., +* ($4+4), %03.

339 Jacek Salij 22 the liturgical consequences of the doctrine of concomitanceY=. Of course, from this perspective, Eucharistic adoration or resistance to communion for infants is pure Latinism, which stems from Western theology and has nothing to do with Catholic dogma. e pro-western trend, weaker in number, found its hot leader in the bishop of Stanisławów region, H. Chomyszyn. In his opinion, the liturgical pur- ism of the Byzantines was a deadly threat to the religious vitality of the Uniate Church. He considered the doctrinal hostility of the Byzantines towards the creative religious inﬂuences of the Western Church as a manifestation of the schismatic spirit. Understanding the need for a special rite for converts from the Orthodox Church, he believed that the desire to adapt the liturgy more closely to Catholic spirituality would be born in them organically, as they become more deeply rooted in the Catholic ChurchY>. We should also mention the developing neo-Uniate movement in pre-war Poland, which set itself the goal of restoring union in the former Russian par- titionYN. Despite celebration of God’s service in the rite adopted in the Russian Orthodox Church, i.e. Byzantine-Slavic, it is diﬃcult to see in this movement a manifestation of Byzantine tendencies. Anyway, the movement gathered activists and apostles rather than theorists and theologians. Catholic priests celebrat- ing in this rite gave communion to infants in accordance with its principlesYQ.

Summary

$. e Greek-Latin dispute over the communion of infants is an integral part of the dispute over Eucharistic worship. e reason for the dispute are the changes in the western liturgy as a result of the reaction against Berengar. e changes themselves were based on drawing consequences from the traditional Eucharistic realism, but they are a novelty in relation to speciﬁc traditional

Y= H. Kostelnyk, Stojannja i kljaczannja w cerkwi , ibid., +* ($4+4), +@$-+@4. Kostelnyk studied this problem in depth in printed in parts in subsequent issues of Nywa work on epiclesis from $4+5. Y> H. Chomyszyn, Pastyrskyj łyst pro wyzantijstwo , Stanisławiw $4%$, 5. erefore, Chomyszyn defends fervently Eucharistic adoration, devotion to the Sacred Heart, apostolate of prayer. Ibid., $4. +0 n. YN Cf. E. Wyczawski, Ruch neounijny w Polsce w latach +=4>-+=>= , STV 5($40@)$, *@4-*+@. YQ ey explicitly provide for communion of infants in the liturgical books of this rite: Liturgical book , Rim $4*%, +5%-+53; Trebnik , vol. $, Rim $4*?, +53-+03: and the columns for these books: Treboispołnienije , vol. +, Rim $4?$, %3f.

340 23 The Greek-Latin Dispute Over the Communion of Infants customs. us, Orthodox theology accused the West of illegitimate novelty in relation to traditional rites, while Catholic theology justified the changes with fidelity to the traditional worship of the Blessed Sacrament. Both approaches reflect two different approaches to ecclesiastical tradition. In the East, more attention is paid to the permanence of the deposit received, while in the West, the need for the organic development of tradition is appreciated. +. In addition, the dispute revealed separate positions on the necessity of the Eucharist for salvation. Some emphasised the sacramentum, while others emphasised res. Eastern theology taught about the necessity of material consump- tion of the Eucharist, and Simeon of essaloniki or Gregory Dattivensis even claimed that anyone who has never consumed the Eucharist can never be saved. Western theology, on the other hand, emphasised that already through baptism man really becomes a member of the Body of Christ. %. e dispute revealed the different links between the theology of the Eucharist and theology of grace. e Eastern followers of infant communion saw in the Eucharist, above all, the food of a new creation, food for eternal life. Defenders of the Western custom emphasised that infants are free from temptation, so they do not need the help of the Eucharist in the fight against evil. e first theology links the Eucharist rather with the grace of holiness, the second with the grace of works. *. e diversity of liturgical disciplines is also reflected in pastoral ministry. In the churches that administer all three sacraments of initiation to infants, there is less awareness that anyone, not only a priest, can baptise someone in life-threatening circumstancs. ?. e original attitude towards the other party’s otherness was characterised by aggressive reluctance on both sides. However, the allegation of a deviation from the truth appeared only in Eastern theology. is is not some particular merit of West- ern theology but is due to objective reasons. Western theology, by its very nature, could not sharply stigmatise a custom, the tradition of which was indisputable. 3. At the Florentine Council, which clearly distinguished heresies from legiti- mate differences, the communion of infants was placed on the list of the latter. However, as the Florentine solutions were not widely accepted, they increased the original diversity of positions. In the Orthodox Church, it is still generally considered dogmatically unacceptable not to grant communion to infants. e position of Orthodox theology has become established especially during anti-Uniate polemics. In the Western Church, on the other hand, the admissi- bility of the Eastern custom is now clearly proclaimed, however, quite o;en its own custom is considered to be more appropriate. is teaching was officially confirmed by the Council of Trent.

341 Jacek Salij 24

0. Uniate theology, in defending the legitimacy of Western custom, basically uses classical Western argumentation, which sees in the Eucharist above all the source of works and graces. 5. In the post-reform period, especially in the polemic a;er the Brest Union, Catholics of both rites o;en invoke the communion of infants as a testimony to the legitimacy of communion in one form. 4. e Uniate opponents of the Latinisation of the union most o;en did not take a clear position on the western influences on the Eucharistic spirituality of the Uniate Churches. e subject of their criticisms were, by their very nature, those manifestations of Latinisation which have no connection with dogma. e silence about transformations in Eucharistic spirituality expressed rather the conviction that these changes were correct. Partly, however, it could have been tactical silence. History also knows of the silence caused by the disregard for theology, which was replaced by official orders and repressions during the liquidation of the union. $@. Using the example of the communion of infants, the difficulty of carrying out a strict borderline between the catholicisation and the Latinisation of the Eastern liturgy is revealed. With regard to Eucharistic customs, this distinction depends on the extent to which the doctrine of concomitance and the liturgical consequences drawn from it in the Western Church belong to the essence of Catholicism, and to what extent they are only a specific feature of Western spirituality. Traditionally, the first alternative was rather accepted, but in the twentieth century there were opinions in favour of a second solution.

342